ModelRailroadForums.com is a free Model Railroad Discussion Forum and photo gallery. We cover all scales and sizes of model railroads. Online since 2002, it's one of the oldest and largest model railroad forums on the web. Whether you're a master model railroader or just getting started, you'll find something of interest here.
Isn't that second unit a SD40-2? I can't remember seeing those big porches on a 40, but they're a spotting feature on the Dash-2's.
I may not have known the model, but I knew the maker by the handrails. Athearn handrails from that era were very distinctive, they were steel wire and the stanchions were very plain, and didn't match anything from EMD. You had to form the top of the stanchion around the handrail, and it was hard to get the bend correct.
I looked at the truck on the SD40, most SD40-2s had HTC trucks, and the sideframe on the models is completely different. An HTC would have the dash 2 shock absorber on the center axle. All the ones I have ever seen say "SD40" on the box, though I agree those porches are pretty big for a straight 40. Also, the SD40 doesn't have the rectangular engine are vent at the rear of the dynamic brake hatch.
You may be right about the trucks, but it is an old Mehano, first imported by AHM. They were known in those years for not very accurate models due to shortcuts, omissions and "imaginerring".
You may be right about the trucks, but it is an old Mehano, first imported by AHM. They were known in those years for not very accurate models due to shortcuts, omissions and "imaginerring".
I don't know about ATSF numbering, but from the years this model was made, up until relatively recently, all manufacturers manufactured foobies, be they cars or locomotives. The push more more realistic numbers has occurred in the past 10 years or so. While I believe that car foobies will be with us from now on, if just to keep costs down, a locomotive foobie is becoming rarer, and rarer.
?Foobie? I can guess the meaning from the context. But I've never heard that word before. (Mind you, my ignorance in general is pretty much infinite.) What's it literally stand for or derived from?
Fake, false, untrue. It's not in the dictionary that I know of, but within the hobby its a car, or locomotive that has an incorrect number on it or is lettered for a railroad that never had them. To keep costs down the manufacturers used to letter all manner of cars and locomotives for railroads that wouldn't have ever owned them, the thinking was if they could sell 5000 locomotives lettered for all sorts of different roads instead of 500 for the railroads that actually had the locomotive, costs would be spread over those 5000, instead of the 500. Until the push for accuracy gained a lot of backing, this was a normal practice.
Athearn was "famous" for doing this with their yellow box, then BB kits, both cars and locomotives.
But a dime will get you a dozen, no car designer, for the majority of makers, is sitting there with an ORER making sure his freight cars are accurate for every railroad they're cars are lettered for.
I did read somewhere that manufacturers are actually finding that a market exists for "foobies" (good word, so I'll use it). I guess if you're a fan of a particular fallen flag RR, it would be nice to make believe it survived into modern times. While looking for locos and rolling stock for my new interest in MRL, I came across an Intermountain announcement that an ES44AC is due for release early next year. When I inquired on the Yahoo group, was told that there weren't any GE's at all on their roster, but, more or less, if I was keen on GE, why not.
My solution to running stuff the RR doesn't have is to set the modelling period 6 months in the future. That way I can argue that the RR will be buying it soon.
As to the Intermountain 'what if's', I guess people don't complain about them because the manufacturer has never tried to claim that the liveries where prototypical. They are just for fun. Rivet counters can't argue with that.
Obviously, you don't belong to the same forums I do. On some of those, manufacturers are flamed for having a stripe a scale 1/4" too thick, and refusing to purchase locomotives painted in that "fantasy paint scheme".
Personally, I think those kind of people need to either relax and enjoy their hobby, or find another one they can relax and enjoy. I'm not sure if alcoholism can be defined as a hobby, though...
Which railroad was that? A Protolance D&RGW brought forward into modern day would be the same. Other than a few Alcos that were more or less forced on them due to the effects of WWII, it was an all EMD road. They thought was that keeping the manufacturer the same reduced maintenance costs. One didn't need workers for both types of locos, didn't need to keep parts for different manufacturers, same maintenance schedule, etc.
It's an interesting operation. A lot of 2nd hand, older locos, lots of variety of rolling stock and what they carry and service. BNSF has trackage rights (at the moment I think it's actually leased from BNSF)and uses it a lot. CSX has been known to use it as well also. Bummer for me is that UP doesn't and most of my stuff is UP.
Not really. Athearn, Atlas, Model Power, Life Like, just about every maker, made foobies almost exclusively from when they started making what ever locomotives. There wasn't the demand for accuracy as it is today. No one really worried about locomotive numbers and details as it is today. Loco models were generally offered with one number, and occasionally two and most of the time, the numbers were foobies as well. The numbers wouldn't even be correct for the roads the loco was painted into. Most didn't even care what the loco was painted, as long as it was painted into the schemes of their favorite roads. Anyone who wanted their locos to be correct would strip, repaint and decal it. They would sometimes even go as far as detailing the loco as best they could, mostly just removing the cast on grabs, and replacing them with wire ones. There wasn't many detail parts available for diesels. There was only 2 manufacturers at that time making parts for diesel projects, and they were Cal-scale and Kemtron.
Which railroad was that? A Protolance D&RGW brought forward into modern day would be the same. Other than a few Alcos that were more or less forced on them due to the effects of WWII, it was an all EMD road. The thought was that keeping the manufacturer the same reduced maintenance costs. One didn't need workers for both types of locos, didn't need to keep parts for different manufacturers, same maintenance schedule, etc.
I believe you. Many RR were "brand" specific when it came to their loco's, but there weren't many modelers that were like that. Its only been recently, within the past 15 years or so, that modelers have demanded the models be painted in specific road names, with the correct details and such. Frankly I would not have minded if the manufacturers offered their locos not just painted for the correct roads with correct details but also offer them as undecorated models with details in a parts bag. The details would be road specific, like an NS pack, Conrail, CSX etc., and also a "generic" bag of details that would have a mixture of parts not as extensive as the road specific one. I also wouldn't have minded if they offered their stuff painted and lettered as a foobie, with the generic bag of details included.
It's an interesting operation. A lot of 2nd hand, older locos, lots of variety of rolling stock and what they carry and service. BNSF has trackage rights (at the moment I think it's actually leased from BNSF)and uses it a lot. CSX has been known to use it as well also. Bummer for me is that UP doesn't and most of my stuff is UP.
MRL as in Meadow River Lumber co. But no reason not to use the opportunity to add something that isn't an EMD to your MRL roster. After all it's still the MRL RR, right?
